Sasha, representing Shenzhen University and Shandong Luneng, faced Qian Tianyi in a match where the score was tied at 1-1. In the third set, with Sasha leading 8-7, a controversial moment occurred during their rally. Sasha, being very perceptive, heard the sound of the ball hitting the table and believed it was a net touch rather than out of bounds. However, Qian Tianyi, possibly not paying attention due to the intense competition, indicated that there was no net touch.
Sasha insisted on her position, having played for over a decade and being able to hear such subtle sounds, knowing it was the sound of a net touch. She sought assistance from the referee, requesting to review the Hawk-Eye replay. Initially, the referee seemed indifferent, but Sasha explained that if the ball goes directly off the table, there would be no sound, but a net touch would be audible, and she had indeed heard it.
The referee appeared somewhat unhappy and responded that there was no sound, but Sasha continued to request the Hawk-Eye review. It's unclear whether the review took place, but the point was ultimately awarded to Qian Tianyi.
In this match between Sasha and Qian Tianyi, netizens felt indifferent about which player received the point, and there should be no blame placed on Qian Tianyi, as she has the right to advocate for herself if she genuinely did not see or hear the net touch.
We, as fans of Sasha, must approach this issue fairly and justly, avoiding accusations without substantial evidence that the opponent knowingly lied about the net touch.
If the Hawk-Eye review confirmed no net touch and the point was awarded to Qian Tianyi, the referee made the correct decision. However, if the review was not conducted and the point was awarded based solely on the lack of audible sound, that would be an issue with the referee.
Does the referee have the same level of perception as Sasha? Sometimes, referees need to ask others about the score during judgment, indicating they may be distracted, while players are highly focused and tense during play. If Sasha claims to have heard the sound, it's likely that the ball did hit the table.
Regardless of whether it was a net touch or not, the referee should maintain a fair and just attitude by reviewing the Hawk-Eye footage to satisfy everyone and ensure netizens believe the refereeing is thorough.
Since the Hawk-Eye footage was not shown, we cannot determine if the ball touched the net. The players can only follow the referee's decision, but we hope the referee will be more patient, listen to the players' doubts, and provide evidence to allow everyone to play comfortably, confidently, and peacefully.
Regardless, Sasha's victory over Qian Tianyi with a score of 3-2 is commendable, especially since she won the fourth and fifth sets convincingly. This point may have ignited her desire to win even more, thinking, "If you don't award it to me, I'll play even harder."
For skilled players, even a misjudged point is not a big deal. We hope that table tennis will introduce replay systems similar to badminton in the future, where even the slightest difference can be seen clearly. With the high revenue of table tennis events and increased ticket prices, shouldn't the organizers be able to afford such equipment?
To eliminate doubts among players and netizens, please use more advanced equipment to capture controversial shots, further embodying the sportsmanship of fairness, justice, and openness.
Congratulations to Sasha for winning two victories on the first day of 2025, starting the year on a high note. We wish her all the best in the new year, may all her wishes come true. #Sasha#